PurposeThe purpose of this study was to verify the utility of existing Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) coefficients and to propose a new prediction model with a new set of TRISS coefficients or predictors.Materials and MethodsOf the blunt adult trauma patients who were admitted to our hospital in 2014, those eligible for Korea Trauma Data Bank entry were selected to collect the TRISS predictors. The study data were input into the TRISS formula to obtain "probability of survival" values, which were examined for consistency with actual patient survival status. For TRISS coefficients, Major Trauma Outcome Study-derived values revised in 1995 and National Trauma Data Bank-derived and National Sample Project-derived coefficients revised in 2009 were used. Additionally, using a logistic regression method, a new set of coefficients was derived from our medical center's database. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for each prediction ability were obtained, and a pairwise comparison of ROC curves was performed.ResultsIn the statistical analysis, the AUCs (0.879–0.899) for predicting outcomes were lower than those of other countries. However, by adjusting the TRISS score using a continuous variable rather than a code for age, we were able to achieve higher AUCs [0.913 (95% confidence interval, 0.899 to 0.926)].ConclusionThese results support further studies that will allow a more accurate prediction of prognosis for trauma patients. Furthermore, Korean TRISS coefficients or a new prediction model suited for Korea needs to be developed using a sufficiently sized sample.
Background We hypothesized that the recent change of sepsis definition by sepsis-3 would facilitate the measurement of timing of sepsis for trauma patients presenting with initial systemic inflammatory response syndrome. Moreover, we investigated factors associated with sepsis according to the sepsis-3 definition.Methods Trauma patients in a single level I trauma center were retrospectively reviewed from January 2014 to December 2016. Exclusion criteria were younger than 18 years, Injury Severity Score (ISS) <15, length of stay <8 days, transferred from other hospitals, uncertain trauma history, and incomplete medical records. A binary logistic regression test was used to identify the risk factors for sepsis-3.Results A total of 3,869 patients were considered and, after a process of exclusion, 422 patients were reviewed. Fifty patients (11.85%) were diagnosed with sepsis. The sepsis group presented with higher mortality (14 [28.0%] vs. 17 [4.6%], P<0.001) and longer intensive care unit stay (23 days [range, 11 to 35 days] vs. 3 days [range, 1 to 9 days], P<0.001). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that, in men, high lactate level and red blood cell transfusion within 24 hours were risk factors for sepsis. The median timing of sepsis-3 was at 8 hospital days and 4 postoperative days. The most common focus was the respiratory system.Conclusions Sepsis defined by sepsis-3 remains a critical issue in severe trauma patients. Male patients with higher ISS, lactate level, and red blood cell transfusion should be cared for with caution. Reassessment of sepsis should be considered at day 8 of hospital stay or day 4 postoperatively.
The aim of this study was to investigate the efficiency of domestic physician-staffed helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) for the transport of patients with severe trauma to a hospital. The study included patients with blunt trauma who were transported to our hospital by physician-staffed HEMS (Group P; n = 100) or nonphysician-staffed HEMS (Group NP; n = 80). Basic patient characteristics, transport time, treatment procedures, and medical treatment outcomes assessed using the Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) were compared between groups. We also assessed patients who were transported to the hospital within 3 h of injury in Groups P (Group P3; n = 50) and NP (Group NP3; n = 74). The severity of injury was higher, transport time was longer, and time from hospital arrival to operation room transfer was shorter for Group P than for Group NP (P < 0.001). Although Group P patients exhibited better medical treatment outcomes compared with Group NP, the difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.134 vs. 0.730). However, the difference in outcomes was statistically significant between Groups P3 and NP3 (P = 0.035 vs. 0.546). Under the current domestic trauma patient transport system in South Korea, physician-staffed HEMS are expected to increase the survival of patients with severe trauma. In particular, better treatment outcomes are expected if dedicated trauma resuscitation teams actively intervene in the medical treatment process from the transport stage and if patients are transported to a hospital to receive definitive care within 3 hours of injury.
Background: Injury severity scoring systems that quantify and predict trauma outcomes have not been established in Korea. This study was designed to determine the best system for use in the Korean trauma population. Methods: We collected and analyzed the data from trauma patients admitted to our institution from January 2010 to December 2014. Injury Severity Score (ISS), Revised Trauma Score (RTS), and Trauma and Injury Severity Score (TRISS) were calculated based on the data from the enrolled patients. Area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) for the prediction ability of each scoring system was obtained, and a pairwise comparison of ROC curves was performed. Additionally, the cut-off values were estimated to predict mortality, and the corresponding accuracy, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were obtained. Results: A total of 7,120 trauma patients (6,668 blunt and 452 penetrating injuries) were enrolled in this study. The AUCs of ISS, RTS, and TRISS were 0.866, 0.894, and 0.942, respectively, and the prediction ability of the TRISS was significantly better than the others (p < 0.001, respectively). The cut-off value of the TRISS was 0.9082, with a sensitivity of 81.9% and specificity of 92.0%; mortality was predicted with an accuracy of 91.2%; its positive predictive value was the highest at 46.8%. Conclusions:The results of our study were based on the data from one institution and suggest that the TRISS is the best prediction model of trauma outcomes in the current Korean population. Further study is needed with more data from multiple centers in Korea.
In Korea, which still lacks a well-established trauma care system, the inability to transport patients to adequate treatment sites in a timely manner is a cause of low trauma patient survival. As such, this study was conducted to serve as a basis for the establishment of a future trauma transport system. We performed a comparative analysis of the transport time, and treatment outcomes between trauma victims transported by ground ambulance (GAMB) and those transported via the helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS) through the National Emergency Management Agency's 119 reporting system, which is similar to the 911 system of the United States, from March 2011 to May 2014. The HEMS-transported patients received treatment instructions, by remote communication, from our trauma specialists from the time of accident reporting; in certain instances, members of the trauma medical staff provided treatment at the scene. A total of 1,626 patients were included in the study; the GAMB and HEMS groups had 1,547 and 79 patients, respectively. The median transport time was different between 2 groups (HEMS, 60 min vs. GAMB, 47 min, P<0.001) but for all patients was 49 min (less than the golden hour). Outcomes were significantly better in the HEMS compared to the GAMB, using the trauma and injury severity score (survival rate, 94.9% vs. 90.5%; Z score, 2.83 vs. -1.96; W score, 6.7 vs. -0.8). A unified 119 service transport system, which includes helicopter transport, and the adoption of a trauma care system that allows active initial involvement of trauma medical personnel, could improve the treatment outcome of trauma patients.Graphical Abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.